5D replacement announcement next week

Emanuel said:
BTW, where are you Barry? Your voice is missed... :-)
Click to expand...
Well, this thread is about a 5D successor, and I have zero interest in shooting on any DSLR. I'm much, much, much, much more interested in the C300 (or its follow-up, the C100, whenever that gets announced) than I am in any DSLR "C" or whatever they do.

If Nikon or Canon want to make a real pro video camera with a large sensor, I'll be very interested in it, but any slow-refresh-rate, no-audio-monitoring, no-headphone-jack, no-ND-filter, no-scopes, stick-on-loupe, frankenrigged, 2nd-system-audio, HDMI-only DSLR? There is nothing that they could do to that type of product that would make me be interested in it.

Not saying it's bad, not saying that people who want it are wrong, just saying that it is sooo not my cup of tea, and that's why I'm silent on the subject. Now, take that exact same sensor and put it in a real camera body, with a real codec, shooting to real media, with real audio and real monitoring and real scopes and real features that are designed for the purpose of making cinema? Yes I'd be interested. But as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks.
 
squig said:
I'm sorted for glass, full set of Leica R and 2x Iscorama 36s.

If Canon just fix the line skipping and rolling shutter, raise the ISO and dynamic range, and improve the codec then the Mark III will be a keeper. I can't imagine why these things wouldn't have been addressed, they all appear to have been with the 1DX. Uncompressed out would be great but if it has a great codec I can live without it. Internal prores 422 or Canon RAW video is the way ahead.
Click to expand...
It is easier the HDMI route. And you are simply fine with the glass. The only thing that bothers me a bit with the Nikon is the absence of pic profiles, at least, so far.
 
Emanuel said:
To me, one of the most interesting wide-range options out there, as of now, it is the D4.

Here is another eloquent sample of David vs. Golias or as you wish, how there's no excuse to not be moviemaker these days. When people have no idea who shot who... As said, 'the' woman is the only safe part of the equation : D
Click to expand...

A David vs. Goliath for sure Emanuel..... I showed a few people this yesterday, not to discourage them from renting Epic, however to show that they have options from either end of the scale, and could still get excellent results no matter what their final choice. Of course EPIC kicks ass at higher throttle and that was their choice. That said I gave advice to someone this week to buy a hardly used AF100 for $2900 dollars vs getting a GH2 under 1K, because for doing production work you can't beat having ND's, proper monitoring outputs just to name two of a longer list a important features.

Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
 
Emanuel said:
To me, one of the most interesting wide-range options out there, as of now, it is the D4.

Here is another eloquent sample of David vs. Golias or as you wish, how there's no excuse to not be moviemaker these days. When people have no idea who shot who... As said, 'the' woman is the only safe part of the equation : D

Click to expand...

To be fair, both of these examples still had thousands of dollars behind them. =B I know, because I was running camera.
 
Barry_Green said:
Not saying it's bad, not saying that people who want it are wrong, just saying that it is sooo not my cup of tea, and that's why I'm silent on the subject. Now, take that exact same sensor and put it in a real camera body, with a real codec, shooting to real media, with real audio and real monitoring and real scopes and real features that are designed for the purpose of making cinema? Yes I'd be interested. But as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks.
Click to expand...


No your not saying it's "bad" Barry, what your saying is practical, and in my opinion, logical. The problem is many newcomers have no real production background experience, so they easily dismiss the features and technology that are considered basic needs for production work, and have been for many many decades. DSLR'S have retarded the situation and made 10 steps back. I gotta laugh that video cameras 20+ years ago had more proper features for production then these HDSLRS. ( no-audio-monitoring, no-headphone-jack, no-ND-filter, ) these are so basic, and that's the short list. It's ridiculous to dismiss them like there some kind of outdated needs. However it seems that's the tone at the moment.


Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
 
Barry_Green said:
But as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks.
Click to expand...

Barry just likes to have a big hulking camera on his shoulder to impress the ladies.

The only form factor related issue I have with DSLRs is the LCD position but an EVF solves that problem.
 
boo said:
Pappas,

Anymore $2900 AF100's still available?
Click to expand...


I wasn't selling it. I was consulted by some people if they should buy the AF100 over a GH2, and that was the price they were going to pay. I told them
to go the AF100 route. For so many reasons. The AF100 resale has bottomed harder than I would have thought it would. Doesn't make sense really.
The features offered on the AF100 just 5 years ago would have placed it in the Varicam range. Now its a camera that is under 4K new, and 3K used. Crazy!
There were two separate AF100 low usage cameras in the DVXuser Market place this month, one 3K and another for 3.2K with extras too on both packages.

Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com/
 
Kholi said:
To be fair, both of these examples still had thousands of dollars behind them. =B I know, because I was running camera.
Click to expand...
You are a lucky bastard, Kholi! Where's the contact of the girls? LOL For next GH series release? ;-)
 
"as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks."

So the 'shape' is the problem?

As far as codecs go, what Driftwood is doing with the GH2 is now years ahead of many pro cameras... My guess is that they won't catch up soon, making for a really strange marketplace where an $800 body is blowing away (imagewise, yes, I understand the enormous problem of no headphone jack) all other cameras until the 10k range, and leaving some very strange reasoning as to why not to use the GH2... like its shape, for example.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
"as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks."

So the 'shape' is the problem?

As far as codecs go, what Driftwood is doing with the GH2 is now years ahead of many pro cameras... My guess is that they won't catch up soon, making for a really strange marketplace where an $800 body is blowing away (imagewise, yes, I understand the enormous problem of no headphone jack) all other cameras until the 10k range, and leaving some very strange reasoning as to why not to use the GH2... like its shape, for example.
Click to expand...
bingo!
 
Barry_Green said:
But as long as it sits in that DSLR form factor, no thanks.
Click to expand...

All jokes aside Barry, if the Nikon D4 or Canon's new DSLRs have the dynamic range and resolution of an Alexa who's going to care about the form factor? I predict at least one of the DSLRs that hits the streets this year will give an F3 a run for its money, and at under half the price that buys a lot of NDs and sound gear. I know what your saying about the camera being kitted out properly for a production environment but when money is tight and push comes to shove I'll take the best looking picture and work around it. A small lightweight body has its advantages....so my girlfriend thinks anyway.
 
squig said:
I predict at least one of the DSLRs that hits the streets this year will give an F3 a run for its money
Click to expand...

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but re the F3, one already is: the GH2 with Driftwoods best patches. I'm a fanboy in that I'm having such fun with this very small, instant-on wonder, but I also have a RED, an HVX, and a 5d, so a lot to compare with. No, at its best, the GH2 is not as good as the RED 4k downsampled to 1080... but lord does it get close sometimes!
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but re the F3, one already is: the GH2 with Driftwoods best patches. I'm a fanboy in that I'm having such fun with this very small, instant-on wonder, but I also have a RED, an HVX, and a 5d, so a lot to compare with. No, at its best, the GH2 is not as good as the RED 4k downsampled to 1080... but lord does it get close sometimes!
Click to expand...

Educate.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
Sorry to beat a dead horse, but re the F3, one already is: the GH2 with Driftwoods best patches.
Click to expand...
In resolution sure, but not in dynamic range or low light ability. I have a feeling the D4 will surpass the F3 in dynamic range and at least match its low light ability. Corey Rich reckons the D4 is on par with the F3 for moire so the resolution must be good. The GH2 is great in a controlled environment as is the RED. But I rarely shoot in controlled environments. Watch "Hearts of Darkness" and think about whether you would have shot with a RED, GH2, or 5D. After reading all the comments from the D4 promo filmmakers http://vimeo.com/34666308 I'm leaning towards the D4 and a ninja but lets see what Canon brings to the party.
 
squig said:
Watch "Hearts of Darkness" and think about whether you would have shot with a RED, GH2, or 5D. After reading all the comments from the D4 promo filmmakers http://vimeo.com/34666308 I'm leaning towards the D4 and a ninja but lets see what Canon brings to the party.
Click to expand...
I doubt Canon will beat the D4 offer, though. As you well know, lowlight by Canon is not as much grainless as with Nikon, as for instance. I share both parts of your premise. At times, it is simply impossible to shoot some stuff unless with a DSLR. Let's see what comes next week.
 
I feel mixed about the Nikon offering. Was always a nikonian back in the day, and yet 24mbps???? Yes, I understand I can use an external recorder (is there any footage of that our there, BTW), but I want to be able to run and gun and stay small with a potent internal codec. Our 5d, for all its faults has a great little internal codec.
 
Last edited:
Emanuel said:
I doubt Canon will beat the D4 offer, though. As you well know, lowlight by Canon is not as much grainless as with Nikon, as for instance. I share both parts of your premise. At times, it is simply impossible to shoot some stuff unless with a DSLR. Let's see what comes next week.
Click to expand...

The C300 does look very good in low light, it still has some chroma noise but you have to push the ISO to crazy levels to see it. The FS100 noise in Bloom's extreme low light test looks more organic to me as does the D3s noise.

I'm going to be mounting this thing to a drone, helicopters, motorbikes, urban assault bikes, cars, and burly men. Shooting on 3 continents inside a submarine, an alien spacecraft, a 44 gallon drum, a fridge, a body bag, a desert, the bush, and doing a candlelit love scene. I did some tests with the 5D at some locations that I would regard as easy to shoot compared to the aforementioned scenes and the 5D couldn't cut it.
 
Cosimo Bullo said:
I feel mixed about the Nikon offering. Was always a nikonian back in the day, and yet 24mbps???? Yes, I understand I can use an external recorder (is there any footage of that our there, BTW)
Click to expand...

http://vimeo.com/34666308 This was all shot with the internal codec. 24Mbit/s AVCHD with b frames is less than ideal but it holds up well next to the 5Ds H264. I would shoot some scenes with it if I had to but externally to a ninja and prores is the preferred option which I highly doubt Canon will give us, but who knows maybe they will do uncompressed out now that Nikon has it. Canon have at least been working on better codecs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top